Anonymous wrote:What schools have kindergartens with nearly 30 kids and teachers yelling "stop it"? This never happened in my child's school. 19 kids in K, and the veteran teacher had total control of the class. Things were calm, kids had fun and learned, and all in all it was a very nurturing environment. Ditto for 1st and 2nd grade. FWIW, we're in the Olney/Brookeville area, and the class sizes have stayed about the same despite the budget cuts.

My daughter had 29 kids in her K/1st grade class in Olney (Belmont to be exact)

We were in public school in MoCo for K and 1st grade. 28 kids in her class and chaotic. My daughter was getting bullied (too many kids to track what was going on) and was miserable. The school also didn't seem to care that she was getting bullied. We pulled her out, and put her into a private school. I will never send her back to public school here again.

Question re: the supplemental fund idea. Businesses contribute to the schools in a variety of ways, right? Sometimes with direct contributions (I've seen a wall of giving of some sort at Target showing dollar amounts) and sometimes with things like breaks on goods and services/in kind gifts and then also fundraising activities like giftwrap and such. Those are targeted to specific schools though I think. Is the policy prohibiting parent giving explicitly concerned with direct funds from parents? I think I can understand the general theory about maintaining something like equity between schools by prohibiting direct giving by the parents for staff salaries and such, but would a more general fund be possible? (like the monies received through non-parental donations?) Then the schools could use that on non-staff wage expenses to free up money in the budget to use on wages? I'm guessing there is some complicated budgetary reason this is not possible, but if anyone could clarify that would be great.

Anonymous wrote:There already is inequity at the state level. Public schools are financed through property tax at the county level not state level. You can argue that this creates even more inequity. MOCO has stronger schools so more people want to live there than in PG county. Property values increase because more people want to live in MOCO raising the tax revenue for MCPS schools which improves the schools.

How about the great inequity that private schools (which are set up as non-profits) don't pay ANY property tax at all. Can you imagine the revenue that could be generated if all the private schools paid their fair share of property tax and that money was specifically earmarked to a fund for the public schools. Fabulous and fair.

There already is inequity at the state level. Public schools are financed through property tax at the county level not state level. You can argue that this creates even more inequity. MOCO has stronger schools so more people want to live there than in PG county. Property values increase because more people want to live in MOCO raising the tax revenue for MCPS schools which improves the schools.

Anonymous wrote:I get financial aid to send DC to private. We are not wealthy. Anyone can do the same.

I am not trying to keep you from doing anything. I was pointing out that helping rich schools get richer is problemmatic. Is sending your kid to private because your school sucks problemmatic, too? Probably. At least I'm wrestling wit it.

What if we're all wrestling with doing what's best for our kids? What if someone's solution is to donate private money to help their child's school? I just disagree that that should be considered a bad or socially unjust thing to do.

I also disagree that "anyone" can send their child to private schools. That's not true, there are limited spots and tuition obstacles (not everyone can get 100% tuition). Again, I don't understand how you could begrudge public school parents from supplementing their schools -- after all you aren't wealthy, but your child benefits from the wealthy private donors that fund your private school, doesn't he/she?

I get financial aid to send DC to private. We are not wealthy. Anyone can do the same.

I am not trying to keep you from doing anything. I was pointing out that helping rich schools get richer is problemmatic. Is sending your kid to private because your school sucks problemmatic, too? Probably. At least I'm wrestling wit it.

Anonymous wrote:One other thing, re sending kid to private: would it be less hypocritical, think ye, for me to sell my house in a working class neighborhood to go live with rich folks in the expensive neighborhoods with good schools? That is what most people do, out of love for their kids, no matter what their values, but if you think private school is hypocritical for someone with social justice inclinations, so is moving to a better school district.

Sending your DC to private school benefits ONE child (your own). Being part of a public school and advocating (and paying for) additional services/staff benefits the entire school. There is a difference.

Are you telling me, it doesn't bother you even a little bit, that a private school parent would suggest that public school parents can't do what they think is best for their school/raise funds for their school/staff that school for the benefit of that school? Can't see the social justice in a private school parent saying, essentially, oh, you public school people should just take the minimum MOCO standards. Talk about haves and have nots: either minimal standard publics or leave and spend your money on private. That doesn't sound like social justice by any standard.

Anonymous wrote:PP - you are talking about communist societies, not socialist. There is truly a difference. And I said I was joking, yes?

I don't think it is hypocritical to send my kid to private school and advocate for all public schools to be great. I do think it is sad, though. I'd send my kid to public if it was a good fit. But we are sending him instead to a religious school that offers something totally different than a high quality public would, because they are allowed to put religious values (like serving the poor, simplicity, prayer) into their day.

If the public school was great, we'd give it a good try.

However, I support the schools with my tax dollars, and would be happy to be taxed more, even though my kid doesn't go to the school.

I'm not saying its not a difficult choice, morally. But the best I can do is advocate for what I think is just, and try to do the best by my son.

You are a hypocrite. What is particularly odious is that you are trying to stop public school parents from making their schools better for ALL the children in their particular school...all the while, you have opted out of public school b/c you can afford private. If "social justice" was important to you, you wouldn't send your kid to private school. Nothing wrong with that choice, per se, it is the hypocrisy. You claim to support social justice, while participating in an elitist pay-for-school private system (After all, social justice would dictate that, because all kids can't afford it, your kid shouldn't have it, right). On top of that, you suggest that parents in the public system should not try to make their schools better...simply b/c they can't make all schools better. Yes, hypocrisy.

Anonymous wrote:One other thing, re sending kid to private: would it be less hypocritical, think ye, for me to sell my house in a working class neighborhood to go live with rich folks in the expensive neighborhoods with good schools? That is what most people do, out of love for their kids, no matter what their values, but if you think private school is hypocritical for someone with social justice inclinations, so is moving to a better school district.

It is hypocritical for a private school parent to advocate AGAINST public school parents supplementing their schools with their own funds and to invoke social justice in the process. Very hypocritical indeed.

One other thing, re sending kid to private: would it be less hypocritical, think ye, for me to sell my house in a working class neighborhood to go live with rich folks in the expensive neighborhoods with good schools? That is what most people do, out of love for their kids, no matter what their values, but if you think private school is hypocritical for someone with social justice inclinations, so is moving to a better school district.

PP - you are talking about communist societies, not socialist. There is truly a difference. And I said I was joking, yes?

I don't think it is hypocritical to send my kid to private school and advocate for all public schools to be great. I do think it is sad, though. I'd send my kid to public if it was a good fit. But we are sending him instead to a religious school that offers something totally different than a high quality public would, because they are allowed to put religious values (like serving the poor, simplicity, prayer) into their day.

If the public school was great, we'd give it a good try.

However, I support the schools with my tax dollars, and would be happy to be taxed more, even though my kid doesn't go to the school.

I'm not saying its not a difficult choice, morally. But the best I can do is advocate for what I think is just, and try to do the best by my son.